Euthanasia - I am confused

[Sportsman]

If a loved one genuinely wanted to end their life and had a good reason to do it (terminal illness / intractable pain / permanent disability with no quality of life) and they needed my help to do it, then I would just get on and do it without all of the protracted and useless court appearances trying to get the law changed.

As has been said, if your motives are right then these cases never end up in prison and if your motives are not so pure then maybe we need some form of control.

As a nurse I regularly gave terminaly ill patients large (prescribed) doses of painkiller in the knowledge that it would have the effect of shortening their life.

It was common knowledge and common practice.

It is now the case that after Harold Shipman, Drs. are too scared to prescribe this type of dose.

[kleinboet]

I think what is confusing me is why this law is in place at all, surely one doctor and a second opinion should be enough! After all if a person is a "consenting adult" he should know his own mind!

 

I have had to have two animals "put down" due to their pain and lack of "quality of life" - but the authorities will not let an old man - crying out to die as the pain killers are not strong enough - take his own life

Surely that is cruelty in the worst way!!!

[DavyR]

Don't forget the hypocratic oath specifically states a Doctors job is to preserve life.

 

Doctors in the UK (I don't know about the US) aren't obliged to take the Hippocratic Oath, although it seems to be a general assumption that they do.

 

The gist of the oath, and a maxim that UK doctors would always attempt to stand by, is "First do no harm".

 

It *could* be argued that allowing a terminally-ill patient to be in pain contravenes that.

[Newt]

The original Hippocratic Oath did have the "no deadly drug" clause but also several others that are similarly out of date.

 

.......

I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.

 

I will not use the knife, not even on sufferers from stone, but will withdraw in favor of such men as are engaged in this work.

..........

[Ken L]

The Hippocratic Oath is one of the great myths in medicine. Doctors do not make any such oath.

 

I see that the RCN has just altered it's stance on enthanasia from activly against to neutral so clearly, a free and open debate is needed in parliament to decide whether a change in the law is needed.

 

Its been going on for years in the medical circles its just ignored.

isn't a viable position because having it go on despite it being illegal makes it impsible to detirmine whether any action taken occurs with the consent of the patient or their family and leaves the door open to procecution of doctors who are genuinly doing what they feel is best for their patients.

 

Putting that kind of decision in the hands of one person and having a legal framework that means that it's impossible for that person to discuss whet they're doing is a very good way to create monsters such as Shipman.

[Steve Walker]

I think what is confusing me is why this law is in place at all, surely one doctor and a second opinion should be enough! After all if a person is a "consenting adult" he should know his own mind!

 

There are powerful lobbies against it, KB; for example:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/ch...hanasia_2.shtml

[kleinboet]

Ah! The "religion" that won't pray to God - Despite being told to do so from his son! They won't even speak to Jesus, but do it through the virgin Mary - even though the Bible expressly tell them not to! Yet believe that the PRIEST can forgive them their sins!! They also ban birth control of any kind, population regulation etc.

They, like another religion, take pieces of the Bible that suit them, and spout them for all to know!

But I am not talking religion here, I am talking humanitarianis!m

Edited July 25, 2009 by kleinboet

[Steve Walker]

But I am not talking religion here, I am talking humanitarianis!m

 

I know - but it's difficult to separate them when a church takes a strong view on a matter of personal morality, because there is still a view in this country that religious leaders have a moral authority. Indeed, the Church of England (which also opposes legalised euthanasia) is in a position through representation in the House of Lords to actively influence the law of the land.

[chesters1]

Ah! The "religion" that won't pray to God - Despite being told to do so from his son! They won't even speak to Jesus, but do it through the virgin Mary - even though the Bible expressly tell them not to! Yet believe that the PRIEST can forgive them their sins!! They also ban birth control of any kind, population regulation etc.

They, like another religion, take pieces of the Bible that suit them, and spout them for all to know!

But I am not talking religion here, I am talking humanitarianis!m

 

ah religion says its ok to massacre the fit and healthy but not the sick

if you want to euthanase your sick send them to war on the opposite side

the zealots that ban contraception is the catholics after all if no-one got pregnant where would their sexual urges for young boys go ,gotta think of the future ya know.

theres nothing humanitarian in religioun ,never has been never will ,its purely a money and power making scam ,it wouldn't work if they lived up to what they preach.

 

as for changing laws thats up to parliament and what do MP's care about us or infact their own families or anyone else but themselves,if they did there'd be more carrots than sticks and useful thoughtful laws made that help not hinder the voters

Edited July 25, 2009 by chesters1

[Sportsman]

Ah! The "religion" that won't pray to God - Despite being told to do so from his son! They won't even speak to Jesus, but do it through the virgin Mary - even though the Bible expressly tell them not to! Yet believe that the PRIEST can forgive them their sins!! They also ban birth control of any kind, population regulation etc.

They, like another religion, take pieces of the Bible that suit them, and spout them for all to know!

But I am not talking religion here, I am talking humanitarianis!m

 

 

Errrrrr. the Roman Catholic Church is just that, a church, not a religion. The religion is christianity which, surprise, surprise is the same as yours.